What is "the opposite of terrorism?"
Michael Sanger
request. Since 9/11 several of my friends and I have been thinking a lot
about the question "what is the opposite of terrorism?" Not "how do we
fight terrorism" or even "how do we protect ourselves from terrorist
attaks?"
Rather, if we think about what are the root causes of terrorism, about how
terrorists act, and about what they are trying to do -- then what are the
opposites of those things. As a buddhist ideas of maitri, tonglen,
awareness and the like come to mind. I am working on a book that will share
these explorations, and while there will be some "buddhist" content, it is
meant for somebody who is not interested in Buddhism in particular.
Certainly HHDL has presented one "opposite" to terrorism, but I'm looking
for as many examples and ideas as I can find.
Please share your thoughts here, or at www.tootsite.org, where we've started
to post some of our ideas.
thank you
michael in washington dc
Nick
Klaus schmetterling
"Michael Sanger" <msa...@cox.rr.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
IqLG8.160410$YQ1.47...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...
: I used to be on this newsgroup several years ago, and have returned with a
: request. Since 9/11 several of my friends and I have been thinking a lot
: about the question "what is the opposite of terrorism?" Not "how do we
: fight terrorism" or even "how do we protect ourselves from terrorist
: attaks?"
:
: Rather, if we think about what are the root causes of terrorism, about how
: terrorists act, and about what they are trying to do -- then what are the
: opposites of those things. As a buddhist ideas of maitri, tonglen,
: awareness and the like come to mind. I am working on a book that will
share
: these explorations, and while there will be some "buddhist" content, it is
: meant for somebody who is not interested in Buddhism in particular.
Terrorism and terrorists, axies of evil, etc. are words that indicate
demonization. Terrorists want various things. What they want is not wanted
by the other camp. Neither of the camps will give in to what the other camp
wants. Both camps will use violence to impose their will. Violence that
won't spare civilians and even target them if non-civilians can't be hit.
The opposite of terrorism is instauring dialog and making compromises.
Dialog can start when the others are no longer demonized and when their
needs are acknowledged.
: Certainly HHDL has presented one "opposite" to terrorism, but I'm looking
:
:
:
:
Dublin
by hatred.
"Michael Sanger" <msa...@cox.rr.com> wrote in message
news:IqLG8.160410$YQ1.47...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...
William Tucker
send any demon running for the exit..because you will be
giving off love like the sun
Wm
Michael Sanger
question. But I think that planned acts of kindess, such as helping feed
the hungry and care for the sick are also "opposites". thanks for you
input.
michael
"Dublin" <mcc...@bellsouth.nospam.net> wrote in message
news:5LSG8.29370$mG.11...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
Michael Sanger
So the hard question is how to begin or continue dialog when one or both
parties aren't interesting in playing, and just want to fight? Any thoughts
on this?
michael
"Klaus schmetterling" <klaus.sch...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
news:3ceb8ffb$0$237$626a...@news.free.fr...
Klaus schmetterling
: Klaus,
:
: So the hard question is how to begin or continue dialog when one or both
: parties aren't interesting in playing, and just want to fight? Any
thoughts
: on this?
Hi Michael,
You asked me the opposite, I gave you what I thought was the opposite. I
didn't say it would be easy. ;-)
May I remind you that you wanted to go directly to developing maitri and
tonglen for terrorists, thus seemingly wanting to skip my proposition which
is an intermediate one.
Both parties aren't interesting in playing, because of the demonization that
is going on. It should be easier in the States where there is a free press
to present and perhaps develop understanding for the position of the
terrorists. It also would be a lesson of freedom and free expression to the
other camp and the rest of the world. Being the biggest success story
(economical) on earth doesn't help to show that one's own position and POV
are perhaps not the best one and that all other arguments should be
subordinated to that one.
If I focus on only one side, it is because I don't know much of the other
side and because your question was about what "we" could do?
This doesn't help much I am afraid.
: michael
: > :
: > :
: >
: >
:
:
Klaus schmetterling
"Michael Sanger" <msa...@cox.rr.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
IqLG8.160410$YQ1.47...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...
Michael,
What I tried to say in my clumsy way is that you start with a bias by
treating the other camp as "terrorists", whch IMO is a demonization, and by
accentuating that demonization by opposing acts that are the opposite of
terrorist acts, thus "angelizing" the other side and widening the split
between both camps. If you do look only at the acts and the effects of those
acts and not at the motivation behind them, then there is not much
difference between the acts of terrorists and the armies fighting them. If
it is the acts in themselves you disapprove of and want to oppose with other
opposite acts, then you will have to do so regardless of whether they were
committed by terrorists or by national or international armies.
William Tucker
that's a very good point...compassion doesn't turn on and off like a
faucet, it's incorporated into your actions, so that you don't shift into
polarities...
now from that perspective what do you see....
I feel, that there are two things/views to understand/look at
1. the specific are there specific people you can talk to? To communicate,
to understand
to dialog with, to send positive energy to. Do you have enough
information to start?
Should you talk to Americans, Jews, Palestinians? Is it important to be
specific?
Can you facilitate something? Can you enjoy doing it, so that you can
insert
that good feeling into the endeavor?
2. the general, is there a general solution, a broad based approach, a group
to
thing about a general way of acting or addressing the situation.
Changing a
personal mindset is a powerful thing...it tends to ripple across the
fields of
reality. Just talking in general to others about a compassionate
response and
what that would be might generate the key, might un lock the dead
lock....
it's funny how things work....using a different mindset could be
contagious.
Wm
Gilly
would be easy.
If terrorism means killing people out of pure meanness just because the
terrorists hate freedom, as our president says, then the root cause is
either pure meanness or freedom, depending on how you look at it.
In the case of Palestine, it's a civilian population trying to stop
incursions into their homes with the only weapons they have--their bodies.
If terrorism means desperate people resorting to desperate measures, then
the root cause is either the desperation or the oppression that engenders
it, depending on how you look at it.
In the case of Central America, it's a matter of death squads doing what
they were taught by Americans to eliminate an opposing ideology and terrify
anyone who might join or otherwise perpetuate that opposing ideology. If
terrorism means trying to terrify an opposing ideology out of existence,
then either the fear or the opposing ideology is the root cause, depending
on how you look at it.
If terrorism means civilians engaging in acts of war, then the root cause is
just a lack of uniforms.
If terrorism means the desire for revenge or the urge to teach those who
harm us "a lesson", then the root cause of terrorism is the root cause of
every other aspect of samsara, including arbt.
"Michael Sanger" <msa...@cox.rr.com> wrote in message
news:IqLG8.160410$YQ1.47...@typhoon.southeast.rr.com...